Search

Introduction The decisions of withholding or withdrawing life-sustaining treatments are difficult to make in the context of emergency departments (EDs) because most patients are unable to communicate. Relatives are thus asked to participate in the decision‐making process, although they are unprepared to face such situations. We therefore aimed to develop a standardised intervention for announcing decisions of withholding or withdrawing life-sustaining treatments in EDs and assess the efficacy of the intervention on the stress of relatives.Methods and analysis The DISCUSS trial is a multicentre stepped-wedge cluster randomised study and will be conducted at nine EDs in France. A standardised intervention based on human simulation will be codesigned with partner families and implemented at three levels: the relatives, the healthcare professionals (HCP) and the EDs. The intervention will be compared with a control based on treatment as usual. A total of 538 families are planned to be included: 269 in the intervention group and 269 in the control group. The primary endpoint will be the symptoms of post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) at 90 days. The secondary endpoints will be symptoms of PTSD at 7 and 30 days, diagnosis of PTSD at 90 days and anxiety and depression scores at 7, 30 and 90 days. Satisfaction regarding the training, the assertiveness in communication and real-life stress of HCPs will be measured at 90 days.Ethics and dissemination This study was approved by the ethics committee Est III from Nancy and the French national data protection authority. All relatives and HCPs will be informed regarding the study objectives and data confidentiality. Written informed consent will be obtained from participants, as required by French law for this study type. The results from this study will be disseminated at conferences and in a peer-reviewed journal.Trial registration number NCT06071078.

Introduction Dental caries is one of the most common non-communicable diseases in children. The disease management of caries relies on both a preventive individual approach (fluoridation, risk evaluation) and the surgical treatment of established carious lesions. Similar to other non-communicable diseases (obesity, mental diseases, etc), health professionals’ negative perceptions of patients have been shown to affect the quality of disease management. Regarding dental caries in children, some data have indicated the presence of discriminating beliefs and behaviours towards these children and their families in the medical setting. However, oral health stigma related to dental care remains a largely unexplored issue.Methods and analysis This study presents an exploratory research protocol focusing on the perceptions and attitudes of health professionals towards children with early childhood caries (ECC) and their parents. Semistructured interviews will be conducted among medical and dental health professionals, and verbatim quotations obtained from audio transcriptions will be analysed to identify health professionals’ perceptions of ECC and the influence of these perceptions on clinical care for these children.Ethics and dissemination The research ethics committee of the Department of Family Medicine at University Lyon 1 approved this protocol. The results will be published in peer-reviewed journals and presented at scientific meetings.Trial registration number NCT05284279.

Introduction Chronic conditions require long periods of care and often involve repeated interactions with multiple healthcare providers. Faced with increasing illness burden and costs, healthcare systems are currently working towards integrated care to streamline these interactions and improve efficiency. To support this, one promising resource is the information on routine care delivery stored in various electronic healthcare databases (EHD). In chronic conditions, care delivery pathways (CDPs) can be constructed by linking multiple data sources and extracting time-stamped healthcare utilisation events and other medical data related to individual or groups of patients over specific time periods; CDPs may provide insights into current practice and ways of improving it. Several methods have been proposed in recent years to quantify and visualise CDPs. We present the protocol for a systematic review aiming to describe the content and development of CDP methods, to derive common recommendations for CDP construction.Methods and analysis This protocol followed the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic review and Meta-Analysis Protocols. A literature search will be performed in PubMed (MEDLINE), Scopus, IEEE, CINAHL and EMBASE, without date restrictions, to review published papers reporting data-driven chronic CDPs quantification and visualisation methods. We will describe them using several characteristics relevant for EHD use in long-term care, grouped into three domains: (1) clinical (what clinical information does the method use and how was it considered relevant?), (2) data science (what are the method’s development and implementation characteristics?) and (3) behavioural (which behaviours and interactions does the method aim to promote among users and how?). Data extraction will be performed via deductive content analysis using previously defined characteristics and accompanied by an inductive analysis to identify and code additional relevant features. Results will be presented in descriptive format and used to compare current CDPs and generate recommendations for future CDP development initiatives.Ethics and dissemination Database searches will be initiated in May 2019. The review is expected to be completed by February 2020. Ethical approval is not required for this review. Results will be disseminated in peer-reviewed journals and conference presentations.PROSPERO registration number CRD42019140494.